Quashed

Rajesh K.T.K. v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC8 Oct 2012Crl.MC/2932/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court considered a petition for quashing criminal proceedings against a petitioner who remained at large. After trials of co-accused ended in acquittal due to hostile prosecution witnesses, the court found no purpose in continuing the trial against the petitioner.

What did the court decide?

Quashing of criminal proceedings against the petitioner in C.P. No. 103 of 2012 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Vadakara.

Rajesh K.T.K. Vs State of Kerala — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Kerala HC (2012)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN

¶4

MONDAY, THE 8TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2012/16TH ASWINA 1934

¶5

Crl.MC.No. 2932 of 2012 (B)

¶6

SC.306/2007 of ADDL. DISTRICT & SESSIONS COURT, VADAKARA CP.103/2012 of JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE FIRST CLASS COURT, VADAKARA

¶7

PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.5:

¶8

RAJESH K.T.K., AGED 28 YEARS S/O.KANNAN, KARUVARATHAZHAKUNIYIL HOUSE PONMERIPARAMBIL P.O., VILLAPPALLY (VIA) VATAKARA TALUK, PONMERI AMSOM, PARAMBIL DESOM KOZHIKODE DISTRICT.

¶9

BY ADVS.SRI.P.S.SREEDHARAN PILLAI SRI.ARJUN SREEDHAR

¶10

RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT:

¶11

STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.

¶12

BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT. R. REMA

¶13

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08-10-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶14

DCS

¶15

Crl.MC.No. 2932 of 2012 (B)

¶16

APPENDIX

¶17

PETITIONER(S) ANNEXURES:-

¶18

ANNEXURE-I: COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 21.12.2009 IN S.C.NO.306/2007 ON THE FILE OF THE ADDITIONAL DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE, VADAKARA.

¶19

ANNEXURE-II: COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT DATED 31.7.2012.

¶20

ANNEXURE-III: A COPY OF THE ORDER IN C.M.P.NO.6884/2012 IN C.P.103/2012 DATED 13.08.2012

¶21

ANNEXURE-IV: A COPY OF THE CHARGE SHEET IN CRIME NO.399/2006

¶22

ANNEXURE-V SERIES: A COPY OF THE DEPOSITIONS OF PWS 1 TO 4 IN S.C.NO.306/2007

¶23

RESPONDENTS' ANNEXURES :- NIL

/TRUE COPY/

P.A. TO JUDGE

DCS

S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN,J.

¶28

Crl.M.C. NO. 2932 of 2012

¶29

Dated this the 08^th day of October, 2012

¶30

ORDER

¶31

Petitioner is the accused in a pending case which now numbered as C.P. No.103 of 2012 awaits committal to the Sessions Court. Previously, he was ranked as the fifth accused among the ten accused in a report filed by the police after investigation indicting the accused for offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 341, 324, 326

¶32

and 307 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code. Cognizance being taken of the offence and the trial proceeded, the petitioner/5^th accused remained at large. Trial which proceeded against the other accused ended in their acquittal since the injured (PW1) and other ocular witnesses (PW2-PW4), all of them, turned disloyal to the prosecution. Annexure-I is a copy of the judgment rendered in that case. Case against the petitioner, who remained at large, had been split up and included among the long

¶33

Crl.M.C. NO. 2932 of 2012 2

¶34

pending cases by the magistrate when the case against the rest of the accused, had been committed for trial. Petitioner, later, surrendered before the magistrate and he was enlarged on bail. Proceedings for committal of the case against him numbered as aforesaid is now pending before the magistrate. At this stage, petitioner has filed the above petition for quashing the criminal proceedings against him invoking Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

¶35

I heard the learned counsel for petitioner and

¶36

also learned Public Prosecutor. Banking upon the conclusion formed in acquitting the other accused, after their trial, as disclosed by Annexure-I judgment, learned counsel for petitioner contended that continuation of the proceedings against him directing him to face trial would only result in vexing and harassing him, as the very foundation of the prosecution case has been destabilized when trial proceeded against the co-accused. An accused who remained at large when trial proceeded against the co-accused cannot seek for his discharge or acquittal setting forth a ground that the

¶37

Crl.M.C. NO. 2932 of 2012 3

¶38

trial against the co-accused tried had ended in acquittal for one reason or other. Annexure-I judgment rendered ordering acquittal of the co-accused has no relevance except as provided under Section 43 of the Evidence Act, the existence of such judgment is a fact in issue or is relevant under some other provisions of the Act. So much so, circumstances canvassed with reference to Annexure-I judgment would not come to the assistance of the petitioner to seek for quashing of the criminal proceedings in the split up case proceeded against him. However, on the materials placed by the petitioner and also submissions made both by his counsel and also the learned Public Prosecutor, I find continuation of the proceedings against the petitioner may not serve any purpose whatsoever. Learned Public Prosecutor has fairly conceded that when trial proceeded against the co-accused all the material witnesses including the injured had turned hostile to the prosecution disowning its case. When such be the case, where the fulcrum of the prosecution case to found the

¶39

Crl.M.C. NO. 2932 of 2012

¶40

¶41

indictment against the accused as a whole stood shattered, the case against the petitioner was split up earlier since he remained at large, that alone, cannot be a ground for its continuation after securing of his presence. Even if the criminal proceedings against the petitioner are continued in the given facts of the case there is remote chance of founding any conviction against him, and it may only result in wastage of precious time of the court. That also being taken note of, criminal proceedings against the petitioner in C.P.No.103 of 2012 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Vadakara, are quashed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

¶42

Crl.M.C. is disposed of.

¶43

S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN JUDGE.

¶44

DMR /-

Rajesh K.T.K. v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajesh K.T.K. v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Abdul Asif Vs Rashida

Ayyankutty Vs State of Kerala

Unnikrishnan Vs Sajini

Asharaf Backer Vs Central Bureau of Investigation/Acb

Kunjukutty @ Devasia Devasia Vs State of Kerala

Paramu Vs State of Kerala